Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAsbjørnsen, Arve Egil
dc.contributor.authorJones, Lise Øen
dc.contributor.authorEikeland, Ole-Johan
dc.contributor.authorManger, Terje
dc.description.abstractBackground: Good screening tools can be of immense value in educational counselling for adults. We report two studies where we explored the factor structure and discriminative power of the Adult Reading Questionnaire (ARQ) in different samples of young adults at risk for reading impairments. Method: The ARQ was designed to screen for literacy skills with low resource requirement. The instrument includes 11 questions regarding reading and writing skills and 6 questions regarding attention deficits and hyperactivity. The first study included of 246 undergraduate students. One-third of the sample were under assessment of specific learning impairments/dyslexia. The second study included 1475 incarcerated adults, where 1 in 4 reported specific reading impairments. Results: Principal Component Analyses (PCA) with varimax rotation returned four components for the participants in Study 1: Reading skills, Reading habits, Attention, and Hyperactivity. For the incarcerated sample in Study 2, the analysis returned three components, as the Attention and Hyperactivity items were combined. Conclusion: The ARQ is useful for identifying individuals at risk for dyslexia with acceptable measures of sensitivity and specificity, as well as for identifying those who report difficulties with reading and writing but have not been assessed for their difficulties earlier. The increased prevalence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) seen among incarcerated adults must be considered when screening for reading problems as it may confound the scores on reading questionnaires.en_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.titleCan a Questionnaire Be Useful for Assessing Reading Skills in Adults? Experiences with the Adult Reading Questionnaire among Incarcerated and Young Adults in Norwayen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2021 The Author(s)en_US
dc.source.journalEducation Sciencesen_US
dc.identifier.citationEducation Sciences. 2021, 11 (4), 154.en_US

Files in this item


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal